41–50 of 189 posts
As much as in theory inheritance tax is a solution for the problem, I don't think in practice it works well. The ultra rich will always have avenues to escape tax. The middle class instead, trying to secure a better future for the family, will get hit the hardest. I am conflicted about this way of trying to solve the problem. Also, this is assuming the tax money gets used efficiently and not to the advantage of the t…
I wonder how much of that was counting blacks in the South as people (after slavery was ended). During the post Civil War era, they typically made half as much as whites for the same work.
I read a history book years ago which, unfortunately, I can't determine the name of. The current narrative is that minimum wage laws are oppressive racist nastiness, but this book asserted that the Federal minimum wage was intended to put a stop to the practice of paying blacks half as much as whites in the Deep South so as to bring the South more in line with the rest of the nation generally.
The problem with inheritance taxes, property taxes, etc. is that they erode the meaning of ownership and permanence. For example, if I as a parent want to save up and give up my immediate gratification from spending that money so my children have a head start or even a luxurious cushion, what’s wrong with that? That’s me spending my utility the way I want. With property taxes, ownership turns into renting - you never…
Ownership will exist for as long as there's support in governance and law for it. If ownership doesn't deliver enough benefit for the majority in society, then expect society to alter the terms of the bargain.
I see people throwing ideas and most of these ideas rely on politicians and/or govt doing something. Is there a non govt or non politician dependent way of solving inequality? facebook connected the world not govt or politicians. Google made knowledge and information available to the whole world not a politician or a govt. (I understand there are down sides to these companies products but so is there to govts/politic…
The problem with inheritance taxes, property taxes, etc. is that they erode the meaning of ownership and permanence. For example, if I as a parent want to save up and give up my immediate gratification from spending that money so my children have a head start or even a luxurious cushion, what’s wrong with that? That’s me spending my utility the way I want. With property taxes, ownership turns into renting - you never…
Keeping your kid safe from pretty much anything you went through doesn't require 80 billion dollars.
The problem with inheritance taxes, property taxes, etc. is that they erode the meaning of ownership and permanence. For example, if I as a parent want to save up and give up my immediate gratification from spending that money so my children have a head start or even a luxurious cushion, what’s wrong with that? That’s me spending my utility the way I want. With property taxes, ownership turns into renting - you never…
EDIT: I don't agree with the other opinions that reply to your comment: I think the arguments about autonomy and and self-determination hold just as much in personal finance.
Why is inequality a problem if everyone else’s quality of life is improving? Poverty is lower than ever and most adults in developed countries have a smartphone, an unimaginable luxury that not even the richest could have twenty years ago. Things are good.
Globally quality of life is improving, locally the US is regressing to third world status among larger and larger areas. Financial measures somewhat cover up the increase in instability in people’s lives.
The article mentions globalization but doesn't view inequality through a global lens. If you look only within rich nations, yes inequality has increased, because the poor and blue collar middle class have lost a lot of jobs to poorer countries. But that phenomenon is actually reducing inequality as measured from a global view. The biggest issue I have with the article is that it ignores the geopolitical trends that w…
This is the real equaliser, it is not tax and it's not the market. In all honesty even in their example, the 1% in the US is not stable .. it's more like a game of chair, if you blink you can loose your seat.
If we make more and more of the earth/universe usable for humans and only 'the rich' own these usables, why not?